CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI



FIRST APPEAL NO. 406 OF 2008 Date of filing : 13/03/2008

@ MISC. APPL. NO. 600 OF 2008 Date of order : 20/07/2009

IN CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 318 OF 2004

DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : PUNE



Ravikiran Ramkrishna Bhagwat

R/o. Amar Housing Society,

Gopalwadi Road, Daund,

Tal. Daund, Dist. Pune. … Appellant/org. complainant

V/s.

1. Prop.Kumar Bhimrao Haribhakt

Prop. Task machine Tools, Office 1,

S.No.120/894, Santosh Nagar,

Katraj, Dist. Pune – 46.

2. Prop.Kumar Bhimrao Haribhakt

Prop. Task Machine Tools, Office 1,

R/o. Swami Samarth Mandir Road,

Near Panchshil Tiyatar, Daund,

Tal. Daund, Dist. Pune. … Respondent/org. O.P.


Corum : Shri S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member
Mrs. S.P. Lale, Hon’ble Member

Present: Mr.G.C. Sawant, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr.M.B. Pahane, Advocate for the respondent.

- : ORAL ORDER :-
Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

This appeal arises out of order/award dated 30/11/2007 passed in consumer complaint No.318/2004 Shri Ravikiran Ramkrishna Bhagwat V/s.Shri Kumar Bhimrao Haribhakt, Prop. Task Machine Tools by District Consumer Forum (‘Forum below’ in short).

The consumer complaint is filed in respect of non-delivery of machinery ordered. Consumer complaint stood dismissed holding that there is no deficiency in service on the part of respondent/O.P. Feeling aggrieved thereby, complainant himself preferred this appeal.

We heard Mr.G.C. Sawant, Advocate for the appellant and Mr.M.B. Pahane, Advocate for the respondent. Perused the record.

There is delay of 56 days in filing this appeal. Therefore, application for condonation of delay is filed. Delay is not deliberate or intentional. As delay is satisfactorily explained, we are inclined to condone the delay. Accordingly, Application for condonation of delay is allowed and delay is condoned.

The dispute is ultimately confined to non-supply of machinery which as per the novation of contract, was ordered from respondent/O.P. Respondent/O.P. as per his letter dated 10/10/2002, conveyed to the complainant to take delivery of the machinery. Thereafter, on 24/10/2002 to which Forum below also made a reference in its impugned order, stating that instead of originally ordered machinery i.e. Air Compressor and Hacksaw machine, 3 HP Air Compressor and Hydraulic Press Machine, Drilling bits JK Ltd. make (1 mm to 2.5 mm), pipes and fittings, oils, etc. be supplied. In the letter dated 24/10/2002 without mentioning any specific price for the machinery ordered, fresh order was placed. No period of delivery is mentioned. As revealed from the submissions of both the sides, newly ordered goods were also ready for supply to the complainant and he was informed accordingly but a dispute arose about paying demurrage charges as well as the additional charges and difference in price, etc. Under the circumstances, observations of Forum below that there is no deficiency in service on the part of O.P. cannot be faulted with. We also hold accordingly and thus finding appeal devoid of any substance, pass the following order :-

-: ORDER :-

1. Misc. Appl. No.600/2008 for condonation of delay is allowed. Delay is condoned.

2. Appeal stands dismissed with no order as to costs.

3. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.





(S. P. Lale) (S. R. Khanzode)

Member Presiding Judicial Member